Monday, April 09, 2007

Nifong on DNA and the Case

As the case moves toward its expected conclusion, I thought it might be useful to recall some of the more glaring Nifong contradictions.

March 23: Nifong’s office submits a motion to the court affirming, “The DNA evidence requested will immediately rule out any innocent persons, and show conclusive evidence as to who the suspect(s) are in the alleged violent attack upon this victim.”

December 28: Nifong sends a letter to the State Bar affirming, “For me, this case was an eyewitness identification case, one in which I was looking for DNA evidence that either corroborated that identification or refuted it.”

It seems that by openly admitting that he was not looking for exculpatory evidence -- something that is in his "job description," according to the codes of the NC Bar -- he is admitting he violated the codes of conduct that govern his office. Of course, he is much too dense to realize this.

Get out the hook! It is time to pull this joker from the stage, and into the crowbar motel.

Shouthing thomas, and others, keep in mind that this blog is about the Duke Hoax and its many facets.

Other issues that are relevant to the Duke Hoax are noteworthy - like using the Minnesota arests as a point of comparison, or discussing the NTY bias/ineptitude to see how their Duke coverage fits into a pattern.

I'm no Imus fan either, but I think this Rutgers thing has been blown way out of proportion. Yes, the remarks were insulting and inappropriate. But if you've seen Imus' show, that's basically the whole schtick. Everybody is subjected to outrageous insults, including Imus himself (he's been characterized on-air by his co-workers as a walking corpse [a reference to his age], a pedophile [a reference to his much younger wife], etc.). Sharpton, that professional race-baiter, is just doing what he does best: getting airtime from the media to spew his racist hatred and double-standards (BTW, why is it okay for black rappers to routinely denigrate black women by calling them bitches and 'ho's, but it's an outrage if a white person does the same?). People need to lighten up and recognize that not everybody shares the same sense of humor. At least most people understood that Imus was speaking in jest -- not like "legal expert" Wendy Murphy, who had plenty of media airtime to rant and rave about how Crystal Mangum had been savaged with a broomstick by Duke LAX players, and how she had a ripped vagina. I never heard Sharpton or Jesse Jackson calling for Murphy to be fired. I guess it's okay to say outrageous and untrue things if the target of your remarks happen to be white men.

When this first broke, I wasdumb enough to think that maybeCGM was actually raped - by someone, at some other time,at some other place. Sincethe mentally ill and prostitutesARE sometimes victims of thesetypes of crimes, I thought thatmaybe Mr. Nifong would - withevidence of OTHER DNA, go lookingfor the REAL perps.(Yeah, just like OJ would findthe REAL murderer!)

It was quickly apparent that this case was a "fix," andthat neither "outside agitators"nor the AA community were theparties responsible for theentirety of the Hoax.

It may have begun with CGM,but it grew into what can onlybe called a massive conspiracy,involving Duke Administratorsand teachers, Wendy Murphy -(and her ilk in the faux-press)- Law Enforcement Investigators and officials - and the list goes on, with the big prize going toMichael Nifong.

Nifong knew there was nevera "rape," or else he would havelooked at the DNA as evidence -not just exculpatory for the young men who have been charged -but evidence for future prosecution of uknown others. He did not treat the DNA as such, and therefore he could not havebelieved that a sexual assault/rapeoccurred.

I hope that, when the dust finally settles on all this, some intrepid journalist, lawyer, academic or citizen begins a systematic review of ALL Nifong's cases. It is very unlikely that he "went bad" in the spring of 2006. I shudder to think just how many innocent people have done time after crossing his path. It is obvious that there are insufficient checks in the system to derail a rogue prosecutor.

I concur with those who have posted that what Don Imus might have said in one of his morning take-no-prisoners-gab-fests does not relate to the Duke lacrosse case directly.

I didn't see the particular segment; however, he always catches it all from everyone and he has a well-known history of dishing it back.

(We have only to recall the show he put on for Bill and Hillary Clinton at some press banquet during the Lewinsky matter. He opened up with raw and unbelievable dialogue with both of them sitting there behind him.)

It's his style. Sometimes he is hilarious. Sometimes he just packs the magnet.

In this case, I fine it idiotic for him to use this kind of humor referring to female college athletes.

Normally, this kind of thing could have been said and he would have been tossed a gutteral "Ugh!" if those ladies had been white.

The predictable issue here is that the entire episode will be turned into WWIII with calls from the NAACP and various groups in the race industry to end his career.

That is the issue.

The Imus episode can be alluded to when we want to illuminate the horrendous and unapologetic double standards which have been allowed to exist and which have brought such great harm to Reade, Collin, and Dave.

One might get worked up over Imus calling black female athletes "hoes" if we could witness one of these race industry groups coming out for the civil rights of the Duke lacrosse players. Just once.

Mike Nifong ordered a second set of DNA tests in the desperate hope and a prayer that anything---anything!!!---with a dustmite or a particle of lint which might have come into contact with just one lacrosse player would by chance appear.

He was desperate to find some evidence for the conclusions and the rush to judgments he had already put forth in front of the national media.

Mike Nifong had, by then, turned himself into a searching-for-DNA fool.

"Why ? Why ? Why on Earth did Nifong order the second round of DNA tests from Meehan's lab ?

"That only served to drive the nails into the non-case's coffin.

"What could he have been looking for ? Did he REALLY think she had sex with Lacrosse players ?"

----

In hindsight, there is plenty of evidece to suggest that Nifong, even if none too bright, could not have been so brainless a moron as to miss the signs that Crystal was nothing but a lying whore, seeking, in her inarticulate and inconsistent ways, to escape the Durham drunk tank.

But, you raise a telling point, in asking why Nifong would then persist in getting the further, far more sensitive tests -- which (predictably!) succeeded only in proving that Crystal had f*cked every male in Durham who was NOT present at the lacrossse party. How could Nofng have failed to see that result coming?

Two possibilities:

1) He is so arrogant that if the results went awry, he figured he could always hide the exculpatory evidence, in direct violation of statute and every ethical rule, which is exactly what he proceeded to do; or

2) He was carried away by mental illness. I'm not joking. I've heard, from a credible source, that Nifong was on lithium -- and, I suggest, his behavior is completely consistent with the behavior of a bipolar personality in its "manic" phase. Nifong has hidden it very carefully, but watch for this to possibly come out as a defense, only if things reach the stage of criminal prosecution against this low-life, lying POS.

Mike Nifong had, by then, turned himself into a searching-for-DNA fool.

Yes Debrah, he was hoping one molecule might show up and he would exaggerate that molecule into a story that would fit his needs. Quite frankly, I am surprised that he was unable to find absolutely nothing. Good grief, CGM could have run her fingers through someone's hair in the 20 seconds she did her little dance and picked up a stray hair. DAfong was probably counting on this.

Of course they're inappropriate and racist, but the reason his remarks are attracting so much attention is because, by implication, Imus was describing the sistahs as ugly. He violated 1 of the most politically incorrect social strictures: calling black women unattractive.

2:34 - I am not so sure speculating about Nifong's reasons behind his actions is helpful. At the most fundamental level he proceeded with the case in the absence of any plausible theory of liability. And the fact that he lied to conceal that he had no theories of liability only made his position, the community he purported to represent, the defendants' and the Duke community at large only worse. And he wasn't concerned about it (my guess) because he knew that the average Durham judge would buy off on his shenanigans. A truly corrupt and flawed jurisdiction.

Nifong did not just have DNA evidence, there was plenty of other evidence; FA's history & profession, FA's changed stories, FA's wrong alleged rapist identifications,FA's claim of no condom use,FA's inability to recognize accused lax member's in line-up, cooperation of the LAX team, Lax member's claims of alibi's, witnesses to whereabouts of accused,time & date stamped photo's, etc., etc., etc.,DNA evidence should have been the icing on the cake of innocence for these 3 Lax players. Nifong's agenda to railroad these 3 players by ignoring ALL EVIDENCE is the only reason the DNA did not matter.

I believe Nifong believed the DPD stories he was told. He was verbally told (second hand info) of the rape examination etc.

When the DNA came back he thought we just do a more sensitive test.

It's when the second round of tests came back that Nifong showed what kind of man he was! He covered up the evidence and continued with the hoax. He had already painted himself into a corner with all of his interviews.

I wasn't the source of Nifong'salleged mental illness, but I didsuggest to someone that it mightbe used - by his attorneys -in his defense. Especially ifhe's actually charged with a crime,beyond the charges by the Bar.

Profound stupidity, on the otherhand, is not something the Baris going to be willing to listento - (and Nifong's Lawyers can'tsimultaneously use Nifong's insanity plea, if he should choose that method of escape.)

IF Nifong had dropped all chargesat the point where the DNA pointedto others, he might've had a chance of claiming that he wasn'tengaged in wrongful prosecution.That was his opportunity, and he missed it.

Why ? Why ? Why on Earth did Nifong order the second round of DNA tests from Meehan's lab?

That only served to drive the nails into the non-case's coffin.

What could he have been looking for ? Did he REALLY think she had sex with Lacrosse players ?

Apr 9, 2007 1:11:00 PM

Nifong knew those tests were ultra-sensitive, and he figured that if any player had touched Crystal, his DNA would be on her, and that would be "proof" of DNA "evidence." As it was, he leaked a "DNA match" to ABC News after it was discovered that the DNA of David Evans -- and 14 other LAX players had transferred to one of Crystal's fake nails in a trash can.

Now, for forensics purposes, this was a non-event, but it was all the "proof" that Nifong needed. You might recall that Nancy Grace declared this "match" to be a "home run" for the prosecution.

So, Nifong's intentions were extremely deceptive here. That is what makes his withholding of evidence even more grievous (and ironic). He tried to use the YSTR tests to his advantage, and now his dalliance with Dr. Meehan has placed him in jeopardy of losing his career -- and even his freedom.

Sweetmick says Imus can't help it if several of the Rutgers players resemble Dennis Rodman in drag. After listening to that renowned buffoon,Charles Barkley, make repeated racial slurs against whites on national TV, Imus comes across as a breath of fresh air. Criticism of Barkley consists of liberal pundits saying, " oh, that's just Charles being Charles." Similar to what Bill Clinton said of Sandy Berger after Berger was caught with his pants stuffed.

The answer seems obvious: arrogance. He didn't feel any accountability. He was over-confident. He believed that he could do more or less as he pleased. For a long time, he probably did do as he pleased. Simple, old-fashioned arrogance.

Think you are right Bill A..- Initally, I think he knew from SBI that there was DNA in and on her, but did not know who - the reason for all the fanfare - Desperate after being told none of it matched Lax players (I laugh at the image of Nifong getting the fax from SBI - WHAT!!!), he went with the more Meeham, hoping, praying, expecting a dab of a match somewhere. I am not a fan of Imus, but can't imagine what possessed him to make such a totally inappropriate comment.

...Why ? Why ? Why on Earth did Nifong order the second round of DNA tests from Meehan's lab ? ...Did he REALLY think she had sex with Lacrosse players? ::Sure. Someone told him to be prepared to receive the golden goose and he believed them. That is why he never interviewed Precious early on.

A promise from a friend ...is a promise to be trusted.

If someone insists on a trial ... those promise makers will need to be flushed out and their motivations peeled apart like layers of an onion.

Bill A. is right on re the 2nd DNA. Imagine Nifong's shock when Meehan called him on the phone (4/10 I think) and told him no lacrosse DNA but we found some from a few others. OH S***! He must have said. Don't write any report until I get up there.

I recently read a transcript of one of Grace's broadcasts, she kept referring to the DNA on the nail as "human flesh".

While many others have begged the question, "What is taking the AG's office so long to dump this dog of a case?" I have preached patience. But this is really getting ridiculous. I am confident that competent investigators must by now know the charges are lies.

It's inexcusable for them to wait a sinlge second longer than absolutely necessary to make their announcement. This is the height of cruelty to the falsely accused players and their families.

If it comes out down the road that the AG's office came to the decision to drop the charges, then waited a day or more to make an announcement for any reason, it's absolutely inexcusable.

I believed for a long time that this mess was the creation of a rogue DA and an incompetent and dishonest PD, but it looks more and more like those who said the State of North Carolina is just corrupt from top to bottom are going to be able to say I told you so after all.

I can envision a scenario where they decided weeks ago not to go forward with this case and are waiting for some reason until a specific date to announce it.

In his Dec 28th letter Nifong claimed he was looking for DNA that "either corroborated ... or refuted" the all-important eyewitness account [emphasis added].

Geez: if you're going to lie, at least watch your wording. Nifong's letter should have said "DNA evidence that either corroborated that identification or failed to corroborate it" (the absence of an accused's fingerprints fails to corroborate an accused's presence at the crime scene, but it doesn't refute it - because the accused may have worn gloves).

If he knew the absence of LAX DNA would refute the eyewitness account, Nifong can't claim that the absence seemed so insignificant to him that he didn't really mean to leave that fact out from the report (or whatever the heck it is that he's claiming).

Of course the DNA=fingerprint/condom=glove analogy is no good, anyway, even if CGM's own account hadn't ruled out the use of condoms. Given the sensitivity of the tests conducted, a better analogy is DNA = crisply clear, unedited security tape of the specific area where the entry is supposed to have happened. That DNA "tape" clearly shows other people entering, but not the accused. This unmistakably does refute the eyewitness account, and Nifong knew it.

I guess racist has been downgraded to mean racial, and even though the words "nappy headed" have a racial connotation, they are hardly a slur. Was Stevie Wonder full of self loathing when he used those exact words in a song?

As for the word ho or hos or hoes, I don't know what to make of that - live by the slang, die by the slang. If he was truly calling the players prostitutes absent any evidence thereof, that's not good. But that is Imus.

I chose not to listen to Imus and his constant spewing of bile, the liberally accepted hatred of America and his generally negative opinion of most things. But to take him to task for this particular outburst seems absurd. To see him kowtow to the grand poobahs of racial friction is downright laughable - so much for his gun-totin' strong cowboy image. He's a wuss. Senility and impending death due to pulmonary disease might do that to a person...

Now, where were we - oh yes - why did Nifey order the second round of DNA tests. Theories listed here include hubris, mental illness, blind ambition, arrogance, grasping at straws, ignorance, profound ignorance and so forth. Only Mr. "Take it easy guys, I put you in here" Nifong can speak to what went on in his mind and what dwells in his heart of hearts. We will see if he is more of a man than Imus. I think we already know the answer to that question.

I do think arrogance played a part. He was drunk on power and believed he could do whatever he wanted. All of us witnessed his unconscionable behavior in the May 2006 bond hearing for Reade Seligmann.

Here was a person who believed he owned the courtroom, and it is clear that Judge Ronald Stephens had no intention of reining in the Big Ego. So, I figure Nifong believed he could lie and do whatever he wanted, and that he was untouchable.

I think the NC AG would rather let the Reade, Collin and Dave live in purgatory then have the AA community in Durham, NC burn the city down. With people like Wendy Murphy out there that could happen and she would carry the matches.

geeeez....as far as the race hustling Sharpton and Imus squabble...has Al ever spoken out against "hip Hop," which is far,far more disparaging to young black women...crickets chirping...I do not like Imus at all...but why is it that only blaacks can be offended by whites

geeeez....as far as the race hustling Sharpton and Imus squabble...has Al ever spoken out against "hip Hop," which is far,far more disparaging to young black women...crickets chirping...I do not like Imus at all...but why is it that only blaacks can be offended by whites

Blog Awards

About Me

I am from Higgins Beach, in Scarborough, Maine, six miles south of Portland. After spending five years as track announcer at Scarborough Downs, I left to study fulltime in graduate school, where my advisor was Akira Iriye. I have a B.A. and Ph.D. from Harvard, and an M.A. from the University of Chicago. At Brooklyn College and the CUNY Graduate Center, I teach classes in 20th century US political, constitutional, and diplomatic history; in 2007-8, I was Fulbright Distinguished Chair for the Humanities at Tel Aviv University.

Book

Comments Policy

(1) Comments are moderated, but with the lightest of touches, to exclude only off-topic comments or obviously racist or similar remarks.

(2) My clearing a comment implies neither that I agree nor that I disagree with the comment. My opinion is expressed in my words and my words only. Since this blog has more than 1500 posts, and since I at least occasionally comment myself, the blog provides more than enough material for readers to discern my opinions.

(3) If a reader finds an offensive comment, I urge the reader to e-mail me; if the comment is offensive, I will gladly delete it.

(4) Commenters who either misrepresent their identity or who engage in obvious troll behavior will not have their comments cleared. Troll-like behavior includes, but is not limited to: repeatedly linking to off-topic sites; repeatedly asking questions that already have been answered; offering unsubstantiated remarks whose sole purpose appears to be inflaming other commenters.

"From the Scottsboro Boys to Clarence Gideon, some of the most memorable legal narratives have been tales of the wrongly accused. Now “Until Proven Innocent,” a new book about the false allegations of rape against three Duke lacrosse players, can join these galvanizing cautionary tales . . , Taylor and Johnson have made a gripping contribution to the literature of the wrongly accused. They remind us of the importance of constitutional checks on prosecutorial abuse. And they emphasize the lesson that Duke callously advised its own students to ignore: if you’re unjustly suspected of any crime, immediately call the best lawyer you can afford."--Jeffrey Rosen, New York Times Book Review